On Wednesday, January 17, 2018 7:40:20 AM IST Eric Biggers wrote: > Hi Chandan, > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 07:41:21PM +0530, Chandan Rajendra wrote: > > This patchset implements code to support encryption of Ext4 filesystem > > instances that have blocksize less than pagesize. The patchset has > > been tested on both ppc64 and x86_64 machines. > > > > This patchset changes the prototype of the function > > fscrypt_encrypt_page(). I will make the relevant changes to the rest > > of the filesystems (e.g. f2fs) and post them in the next version of > > the patchset. > > > > Chandan Rajendra (8): > > ext4: use EXT4_INODE_ENCRYPT flag to detect encrypted bio > > fs/buffer.c: make some functions non-static > > ext4: decrypt all contiguous blocks in a page > > ext4: decrypt all boundary blocks when doing buffered write > > ext4: decrypt the block that needs to be partially zeroed > > ext4: encrypt blocks whose size is less than page size > > ext4: decrypt blocks whose size is less than page size > > ext4: enable encryption for blocksize less than page size > > > > Thanks for working on this! We've wanted this for a while (both so that it > works on PowerPC with a 64K PAGE_SIZE, and so that people can't screw up their > 1K blocksize filesystems by enabling the 'encrypt' flag), but no one ever got > around to it. And it's not easy! > > First, just a few notes that didn't fit into my comments for the individual > patches. > > Updating fscrypt_zeroout_range() seems to have been missed. Currently it > assumes block_size == PAGE_SIZE so it will need to be updated too. > > The file Documentation/filesystems/fscrypt.rst will also need to be updated, at > least to remove the following sentence: "Currently, only the case where the > filesystem block size is equal to the system's page size (usually 4096 bytes) is > supported.". Thanks a lot for the review comments. I will make sure to take care of them in the next version of the patchset. > > Also, on future versions of this patchset can you please also Cc > linux-fscrypt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx? > Sure, I will do that. -- chandan
